- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:34:30 +0200
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: TAG <www-tag@w3.org>, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:15 PM, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote: > On Apr 17, 2014, at 3:11 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: >> Something like Indie UI does seem like a good thing to have. However, >> given how well we have documented fundamental concepts such as hit >> testing, mouse events, focus, scrolling, and now touch and pointer >> events, adding a layer of abstraction seems troublesome. > > Perhaps it would be beneficial to explain your intention of terms like "difficulty" and "troublesome". > Difficult for whom? Difficult for implementers in that they do not have a coherent overview of what the system looks like today and how this will affect it. Difficult for developers in that they have to deal with the resulting interoperability problems between implementations. Difficult for specification authors in that they have to find a way forward everyone can converge upon. > Troublesome because? Because of the implications outlined above. >> Without a solid grasp of the foundation, it's unclear where these >> should be dispatched relative to the others, how setting an event's >> canceled flag affects processing, etc. Akin to adding something like >> <template> to HTML before we knew the design of its parser. > > If by "these" you mean IndieUI events, that's why it's a first public working draft; send feedback if you have some. There are several editorial notes related to your questions already in the spec. You may have missed them when you read the draft. The problem is more that we have not defined the existing event flow in sufficient detail as I outlined in my earlier emails before the thread diverged to Indie UI. If the existing flow was crystal clear, adding a layer of abstraction would be simpler. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2014 10:35:04 UTC